"Trout likely out until after All-Star Break"

[jsnpritchett]

31 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I excited for the return of fat trout.  

[AngelsLakersFan]

Let's see who makes this their avatar...

[Angelsjunky]

Here's the actual clip. He says a whole lot of nothing.

https://www.mlb.com/news/mike-trout-discusses-injury-rehab

[Docwaukee]

25 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Let's see who makes this their avatar...

if he wasn't wearing a hat I'd guess that was a mug shot for a guy accused of animal cruelty.  

[jsnpritchett]

19 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Here's the actual clip. He says a whole lot of nothing.

https://www.mlb.com/news/mike-trout-discusses-injury-rehab

I mean, that's kinda how he's done things all along.  Not the best at talking...

[Docwaukee]

4 hours ago, jsnpritchett said:

I mean, that's kinda how he's done things all along.  Not the best at talking...

it's interesting because by various accounts he's pretty talkative and funny when he doesn't have a camera on him.  Yet in front of the media he just seems like he'd rather be getting a root canal.  

[HanfordGuy]

15 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

Not sure if this has been posted, but from a couple days ago: https://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/baseball/news/angels-mike-trout-likely-out-through-all-star-break/

Not sure how much to read into this, but I guess that puts him on the long-side of the "6-8 weeks", as the ASB is almost exactly 8 weeks from his injury. Bummer.

[Jeff Fletcher]

12 hours ago, jsnpritchett said:

But there's still some amount of "narrative" factored into people's votes, right?  Or at least it counts among certain voters?  If not, and more/most voters are now basically just picking whoever had the highest WAR, then it sounds like we're moving towards a time when we don't even need voting to happen, since MVP ~= "highest WAR."   Or is it a more a case of voters generally choosing between the top 3 or 4 WAR (or other advanced metrics) and there are some shifts within that group based on some degree of "narrative"?

I think the narrative counts for much less than it used to. I can’t give you a percentage or anything. 
 

I am sure the voting tracks closer to the WAR leaders now than it did in 2010.

[Dtwncbad]

6 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I think the narrative counts for much less than it used to. I can’t give you a percentage or anything. 
 

I am sure the voting tracks closer to the WAR leaders now than it did in 2010.

Terry Pendleton says hi

[jsnpritchett]

7 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I think the narrative counts for much less than it used to. I can’t give you a percentage or anything. 
 

I am sure the voting tracks closer to the WAR leaders now than it did in 2010.

I guess I just don't think it's that interesting if voters are pretty much exclusively going by WAR now--especially since I'd be willing to bet that not a single voter could succinctly tell you how WAR is calculated, exactly what goes into it, why different sites calculate it differently, etc. If human beings are still voting on the award, I'm personally totally fine with some degree of subjectivity and "narrative." To me, that's what makes awards fun and memorable: the debates and the stories that surround them. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

Terry Pendleton says hi

I don’t know your point since that was 1990.

[Lou]

Wow. Terry Pendleton is 60 years old.

[Jeff Fletcher]

2 hours ago, jsnpritchett said:

I guess I just don't think it's that interesting if voters are pretty much exclusively going by WAR now--especially since I'd be willing to bet that not a single voter could succinctly tell you how WAR is calculated, exactly what goes into it, why different sites calculate it differently, etc. If human beings are still voting on the award, I'm personally totally fine with some degree of subjectivity and "narrative." To me, that's what makes awards fun and memorable: the debates and the stories that surround them. 

I understand you don’t just want to give the award to the WAR leader without looking beyond that, but I think it’s dangerous to go too much off the numbers and into narratives. 
 

When I vote, I do it strictly by the numbers, but I use more numbers than WAR. I am also interested in contextual numbers, like WPA. I also value offense more than defense (WAR values them equally, I believe.) So that is my “adjustment” that makes my ballot different from the WAR numbers. 
 

However, I try not to let other things (what a great leader he is!) enter into the equation. 

[T.G.]

2 minutes ago, Lou said:

Wow. Terry Pendleton is 60 years old.

He's still a very young man.

[Taylor]

8 minutes ago, True Grich said:

He's still a very young man.

In AW years.

[Angel Oracle]

17 hours ago, jsnpritchett said:

Slight update:

 

So back by

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2022

[Dtwncbad]

35 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I don’t know your point since that was 1990.

Just saying they handed that MVP to Pendleton over Bonds that year because of the Cinderella story of the Braves.

Pendleton had a great year but Bonds (even though he was a jerk) was a more valuable player by any sensible measurement.

[Dtwncbad]

34 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I understand you don’t just want to give the award to the WAR leader without looking beyond that, but I think it’s dangerous to go too much off the numbers and into narratives. 
 

When I vote, I do it strictly by the numbers, but I use more numbers than WAR. I am also interested in contextual numbers, like WPA. I also value offense more than defense (WAR values them equally, I believe.) So that is my “adjustment” that makes my ballot different from the WAR numbers. 
 

However, I try not to let other things (what a great leader he is!) enter into the equation. 

The “great leader” is best utilized as a tie breaker.

You know, it wouldn’t be all that bad to have the MVP award AND a separate “Leadership Award”. . . 

Having that separate award could help the MVP award be a little more consistent.

[Taylor]

25 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Just saying they handed that MVP to Pendleton over Bonds that year because of the Cinderella story of the Braves.

Pendleton had a great year but Bonds (even though he was a jerk) was a more valuable player by any sensible measurement.

But it was 31 years ago, and Jeff's point is that the folks who vote today have different criteria than they did in the 20th century.

[Jeff Fletcher]

1 hour ago, Dtwncbad said:

Just saying they handed that MVP to Pendleton over Bonds that year because of the Cinderella story of the Braves.

Pendleton had a great year but Bonds (even though he was a jerk) was a more valuable player by any sensible measurement.

Absolutely. In 1991. (I had the year wrong.)

[Jeff Fletcher]

1 hour ago, Dtwncbad said:

The “great leader” is best utilized as a tie breaker.

You know, it wouldn’t be all that bad to have the MVP award AND a separate “Leadership Award”. . . 

Having that separate award could help the MVP award be a little more consistent.

Oh please no.

How the hell am I supposed to evaluate leadership?

The manager of the year award is bad enough. 

[Dtwncbad]

14 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Oh please no.

How the hell am I supposed to evaluate leadership?

The manager of the year award is bad enough. 

Let the players choose the leadership award.

Truth be told I am about as uninterested in awards as a fan could possibly be, so whatever. . .

[Dtwncbad]

1 hour ago, Taylor said:

But it was 31 years ago, and Jeff's point is that the folks who vote today have different criteria than they did in the 20th century.

Yes Taylor.  I think we all understand.

[Jeff Fletcher]

48 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Let the players choose the leadership award.

Truth be told I am about as uninterested in awards as a fan could possibly be, so whatever. . .

That would be fine with me. But I think even players would have trouble evaluating leadership of guys not on their team. 

[Dtwncbad]

23 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

That would be fine with me. But I think even players would have trouble evaluating leadership of guys not on their team. 

Taylor what he is saying is he thinks even some players would have trouble evaluating leadership of guys not on their team.